What guidance might utilitarianism offer to questions relating to genetic engineering?
What guidance might utilitarianism offer to questions relating to genetic engineering? The main principle of a utilitarianism is ‘ the greatest good for the greatest number’ Genetic Engineering involves embryo research, selecting human genes, genetically engineering crops, alteration to human genes, stem cell research and much more. According to the utilitarian view, this should be assessed on the basis of its consequences. For a utilitarian, something is beneficial to the extent that it adds to enhancing the quality of human and animal life, and is harmful to the extent that is causes disease, or suffering in any form. Utilitarianism does not accept the principle that human life has absolute value and this should be upheld by whatever the consequences, but it attempts to look at each individual situation to promote the greatest happiness for those concerned. Utilitarian’s would not ask "Is it right to experiment on Human genetic material?" They would want to know whether the consequences of using genetic engineering would be more pleasure and less pain than forbidding it. However, utilitarianism only works if it is actually possible to assesses the results of genetic engineering and embryo research and decide whether they favour all concerned. Many scientists would argue that the consequence of genetic engineering will increase of pleasure and decrease of pain.
Medical Ethics And Organ Transplants
Medical Ethics Essay The field of medical ethics is one is of severe complexity, diversity and covering a wide range of topics in the medical world. Within medical ethics it is especially important to consider religious principles and the effect they have on the options for religious believers and effects on faith. One of the key issues for debate, considered to be the most controversial and varying is organ transplantation and organ donation. Religious principles and ethical values directly affect the outcome of an organ transplantation or donation, and for many faiths they should be upheld in all circumstances, even in a matter of life or death. Many medical developments in organ donation are often very controversial and use cutting edge research and development which many religious believers deem unacceptable and religious principles should be upheld. In the words of Albert Einstein ‘science without religion is dumb, religion without science is deaf’. Science and religion therefore must co-operate and coincide in the complex field of organ donation. The first successful transplantation was in 1945 however the idea of transporting tissue or organs from a deceased or living donor has been around since the 3rd century. There are many religious faiths that would reject organ transplantation. There are a huge number of people waiting for a donation organ, as of April
Situation Ethics and Moral Decision Making.
Explain the approach of situations ethics to moral decision making * Origins of the theory in New Testament teaching and development by Fletcher in the 1960s * The central role of love in the theory and the rejection of legalistic approaches to morality * The teleological nature of the theory * Development of key principles associated with the theory, such as the rejection of casuistry, the four working principles and the six fundamental principles * Examples of application of the theory to ethical issues Situation Ethics is an ethical theory which maintains that something is moral if it follows the most loving course of action. The theory was developed by Joseph Fletcher, a professor who was heavily influenced by New Testament teachings, thus making Situation Ethics a religious theory. The theory is follows a teleological approach and is therefore based on the consequences of our actions as opposed to the actions themselves. In contrast to other theories, Natural Law as a suitable example, Situation Ethics is a relativist theory. Basically decisions are made based on the particular circumstance and may vary. On the whole, the situationist decides themselves what they believe to be the most loving course of action. It is a non legalistic theory with no moral absolutes or fixed rules, but rather based upon one solid principle, love. The love in which Fletcher
The Possession of Virtue Leads to a Happy Life. Discuss
Academic Honor Code Amir Meraban 11B May 12, 2014 Nicomachean Ethics Essay The Possessions of Virtue Leads to a Happy Life Most authoritative sciences have been substantiated after a lot of research and accepted by authorities in their respective fields, work not only for the individual good but also for the collective group. Though procuring individual good is not a bad thing, the good brought about for a collective group, such as a city or a country is much more higher and nobler because it is for the human good, as opposed to the individual good. Therefore, gaining knowledge of the good is a crucial part of our lives. There is a vast diversity where goods are concerned. According to Aristotle, “Knowledge of the matters that concern political science will prove beneficial to those who follow reason both in shaping their desires and in acting.” (Nicomachean Ethics, 1095a- 3) Political science is one of the authoritative sciences that have guiding principles that would prove beneficial for those who want to live life with great self-restraint, because it helps to mold or shape their actions and desires. The quality of self- restraint is a virtue by itself and therefore, possessing this virtue leads to a happy life. The possession of the friendship of virtue leads to a happy life. Every individual makes rational choices or does actions to attain the outcome which is
Natural Moral Law - in theory and in practice.
Outline the theory of Natural Moral Law (18) Natural Moral Law is an absolutist ethical theory which means that there is a moral command that is true to everyone all of the time, so it is universal and hopes to achieve absolute morality; “As fire burns both here and in Persia” Aristotle. Cicero stated that humans have the ability to reason and follow an intended purpose so that “true law is right in accordance to nature”. It is based on deontology which originates from the Greek word ‘deon’ meaning duty. This means the motivation of an action is defined independently of its outcome and the action must be intrinsically good rather than instrumental. As it is concerned with reason Mel Thompson expressed the theory as “the rational understanding and following of God’s final purpose”. It is a deductive theory because it starts with the basic principles and from these the right course of action in a particular situation is deduced. The theory is a pre-Christian idea which was first introduced by Aristotle, a Greek philosopher. Aristotle believed that there is an efficient cause which allows us to fulfill our Final cause (telos or purpose). For example we plant seeds and water them as an efficient cause to reach the final cause of a flower blossoming. The efficient cause is a statement of fact of descriptive ethics (saying what is there) however the final cause
All ethical statements are prescriptive. Discuss
“All Ethical Statements are prescriptive” The Philosopher R.M. Hare came up with the idea of prescriptivism and what he meant by this basically was that other people should agree with a statement and follow it due to ethical statements having an intrinsic sense. The role of ethical statements is to say what ‘ought’ to be done and such prescriptions are moral because they are universal. Hare then goes on to talk about the word ‘good’ and that we should always link it in relation to a set of standards, and this therefore means it has a descriptive meaning, However A J Ayer’s theory of emotivism allows people to make decisions more efficiently due to the theory describing the workings of the world accurately. A follower of prescriptivism might argue that because humans are known for breaking and getting confused with laws and rules to do with morality, that they need an easy straight forward guide to aid them to act on instinct and not have to wait to decide what do to. This will allow humans to act in a logical way and fit into society. On the other hand one might point out the illogical necessity of a moral guide. Creating a moral guide whether it’s simple or not does not ignore the fact that it has been created merely for people to conform to society’s preferences. Prescribing what a person ought to do isn’t what they should do, it’s what they are
Explain how Natural Law is both teleological and deontological.
Explain how Natural Law is both teleological and deontological. Natural Law, according to Cicero is, “right reason in agreement with nature.” In other words, Natural Law is a set of five distinct principles which every human being is naturally inclined to live their life by. These five principles are known as the primary precepts. It is said by many that Natural Law is purely deontological considering the fact that you have a duty not to go against the primary precepts. However, if one delves deeper into the origins of Natural Law they will find that in fact, it comes from an Aristotelean teleological worldview and therefore, Natural Law is both teleological and deontological. Deontological ethics is a normative, ethical position which judges morality on one’s adherence to the rules. Deontological ethics in most cases are not interested in the consequence of obeying the rules but instead on one’s duty to the rules themselves. According to Aquinas, Natural Law is the divine will of God and thus, one is sinning if they do something which goes against Natural Law. For example, Aquinas would say that contraception is intrinsically wrong and is an apparent good instead of a real good due to the fact that it goes against the primary precept of reproduction. The fact that Natural Law focuses much on the ethicalness on an action and on the duty to a set of rules shows that
Explain the differences between Cultural Relativism and Cultural Absolutism
A) Explain the differences between Cultural relativism and absolutism. Moral absolutism is the idea that there are set values and that some things are objectively right or wrong regardless of the circumstances. Pope John Paul the 2nd said “ If something is true, then it must be true for all people and at all times” The ancient Greek philosopher Plato supported the idea of moral absolutism because he believed that humans were inherently bad and so we need absolutes to guide us. The opposite of an absolute view is a relative morality, which takes into account the circumstances before deciding if something is good or bad. Protagoras said “man is the measure of all things” which means he believed we need to take our morals from our own consciences and not let a source of authority tell us what is right or wrong. Cultural relativism is the theory that because of the diverse range of cultures and customs in the world means that morality cannot be absolute. The anthropologist William Sumner said “The right way is the way that the ancestors used and which has been handed down” which suggests that morality is entirely dependent on your upbringing and background. This theory directly opposes moral absolutism. For example, in some countries women are supposed to cover themselves in public, in others, women are allowed to wear more revealing clothes if they wish. This means
Assess whether an unequal distribution of property between individuals could be a feature of a just society
3/6/15 Assess whether an unequal distribution of property between individuals could be a feature of a just society? (50 marks) By a ‘just society’ we are referring to the principle of people getting what they deserve – or desert theory. Those such as Nozick believe that individuals have an absolute right to property of income that they themselves create; Marx outlined his belief in absolute equality; Rawls, however, is the only philosopher able to claim the middle ground and suggest a sensible solution: claiming that an unequal distribution of property can, with certain constraints, benefit the poorest in society. Nozick’s view on the distribution of property focuses on the issue of how it came about. Self-ownership of one’s own talents and abilities is key to his way of thinking. If, for example, Cristiano Ronaldo asked his football club to pay him 25p for each ticket sold, the fans being happy to pay the extra, and 400,000 people watched him play that season – then he would be £10,000,000 better off. This is perfectly just according to Nozick, since Ronaldo is using his own talents to make money; which the fans voluntarily gave to him. However, in some philosophers eyes, this would be seen as unjust is Ronaldo was allowed to keep all, or even any, of that money. Be that as it may, Nozick stated that people were ‘ends in themselves’ and any attempt to use
Assess the claim that Free Will and Determinism are compatible
Critically assess the claim that Free Will and Determinism are compatible [35] There is an important relationship between freedom and moral responsibility. I should be ready to accept the blame for the things that I freely do wrong. If I'm made to commit an immoral action, then I’m not blameworthy. If I'm forced at gunpoint to drive a getaway vehicle from a bank robbery, then it isn't my fault. Even if I'm forced at gunpoint to give money to charity, I'm not praiseworthy. Moral blame/praise can only be attributed to actions that are freely taken. Freedom is defined as the power to act, speak or think as one wishes. In general terms, Determinism is the view that all events and actions in the universe are the effects of other causes. Hard determinism relies heavily on the credence that as we are not free at all to act in a different way, we cannot be held morally responsible for our actions. As Aristotle maintained, "nothing happens without a reason". Honderich develops on this but relies on principles of Physics, namely Quantum Physics, to argue that determinism is much more complex - for instance, people may migrate across the planet and undergo profound social changes, yet their values dont seem to alter. Clarence Darrow, A hard determinist lawyer, successfully defended Loeb and Leopold for murder and cleared them of the death sentence. His plea was that they were indeed